4.2 Article

A prognostic score for patients with acute leukemia or myelodysplastic syndromes undergoing allogeneic stem cell transplantation

Journal

BIOLOGY OF BLOOD AND MARROW TRANSPLANTATION
Volume 14, Issue 1, Pages 28-35

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.bbmt.2007.07.016

Keywords

allogeneic stem cell transplantation; acute myeloid leukemia; acute lymphoblastic leukemia; myelodysplastic syndrome; cytogenetics; iron overload

Funding

  1. NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE [T32CA009172] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
  2. NATIONAL HEART, LUNG, AND BLOOD INSTITUTE [P01HL070149] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
  3. NCI NIH HHS [T32 CA009172] Funding Source: Medline
  4. NHLBI NIH HHS [P01 HL070149-050001, P01 HL070149] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (SCT) has the potential to cure patients with acute leukemia or myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS), but a number of prognostic factors can influence the outcome of transplantation. At present, no transplantation-specific risk score exists for this patient population. We propose a simple scoring system for patients with acute myelogenous leukemia (AML), acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL), or MDS, based on a retrospective analysis of 445 patients undergoing SCT at our institution (divided into training and validation subsets). The score depends on 5 variables: age, disease, stage at transplantation, cytogenetics, and pretransplantation ferritin. It divides patients into 3 groups of comparable size, with 5-year overall survival (OS) of 56% (low risk), 22% (intermediate risk), and 5% (high risk). This prognostic score could be useful in making treatment decisions for individual patients, in stratifying patients entering clinical trials, and in adjusting transplantation outcomes across centers under the new federal reporting rules. (c) 2008 American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available